[Skip to Navigation]
February 1992


Author Affiliations

Dermatologist to the Philadelphia Hospital; Clinical Lecturer on Dermatology in the Jefferson Medical College; Clinical Professor of Dermatology in the Woman's Medical College; Lecturer on Bacteriology and First Assistant Demonstrator of Morbid Anatomy and Pathological Histology in the University of Pennsylvania, Assistant Pathologist to the Philadelphia Hospital

Arch Dermatol. 1992;128(2):292. doi:10.1001/archderm.1992.01680120168038

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


Histological examination.—  As the results of the examination of the lesions from both cases were identical we shall deal with them conjointly. All the histological studies were made on tissues taken from the living body; these tissues were handled with care and in accordance with the best and improved methods of technique. The tissues were hardened in two ways: one set in Müller's fluid; the other in alcohol, beginning with a fifty per cent, solution, then changing to an eighty per cent., then into a ninety-five per cent., and finally into absolute alcohol. Some of the tissues was stained in bulk in a solution of lithium carmine, using hydrochloric acid as an agent of differentiation; other portions were stained after section in Bismarck brown, a few drops of a saturated alcoholic solution of eosin serving for differentiation. All the sections were imbedded in paraffine and cut dry, being transferred directly to a glass slide and fixed with a solution of collodion and oil of cloves before the paraffine was dissolved out with turpentine, so that the relative position of the cells to one another as they occurred previous to manipulation was preserved.J Cutan Genito-Urin Dis.February 1892;10:51-53.

Add or change institution